>>7465070>put a screw into a piece of wood>leave it half sticking out to go get a drink of water>ATF man in the yard>oi m8 this is an illegal bump fire stock>I'll have to shoot your dog now>put a plastic stock on your Remington >mill out a few holes for aesthetic>muzzle brake>put a bipod on it>leave it in your garage>ATF man in your garage>oi m8 that looks a little menacing with all those plastic parts and fancy things>that wouldn't be an assault weapon would it?>Nope just looks like one>whelp I'm gonna have to shoot your dog now>assault weapons are bannedYou see it's one thing to ban something that has an explicit purpose like a soda bottle bong or a pipe bomb. That makes sense but banning "assault weapons" just because they look a certain way and have the ability to accept attachments is completely retarded.
>inb4 nobody is doing thatLook up California compliant AR15.
Pic related would be considered an "assault weapon" because of how it looks but it's really just a bolt action AR-15. Just like your dads old Winchester only a different platform.
Would you ban pic related knowing that?
>>7465074BUT MUH PREDATOR DRONES AND TANKS
